Radio 3 schedule changes (‘edging away from speech')

[DracoM]

<< I found particularly depressing today. It seemed to sum up the daily irritations of life in a sadly(and unnecessarily) decrepit country.>>
Yes, yes!

[oddoneout]

<< I found particularly depressing today. It seemed to sum up the daily irritations of life in a sadly(and unnecessarily) decrepit country.>>
Yes, yes!

While not inappropriate for the latest R3 interference, perhaps I could point out that this was directed at weather related irritations - which cannot, unfortunately, be mitigated by turning to CDs or internet radio stations...

[Retune]

"When I was growing up, Radio 3 was my teacher. Now, it’s trying to be my nursemaid and my mindfulness coach ..."

https://archive.is/7shGP#selection-3037.0-3037.107

Yes, it's a terrible shame when a venerable institution once known for its intellectual rigour descends into mindless populism. But that's enough about the Telegraph.

[DracoM]

e.g. Brains Trust?

[Russ]

Hot on the heels of the Radio 3 announcement, the BBC has announced plans for refreshing Radio 4.

Apparently, it's all about 'giving us what we want most, when we want it'. (Well, that's us told, then - dissenters will be directed to the naughty step.)

As usual, what has not been said is as important as what has been said, and I haven't worked out yet what has been ditched.

[Serial_Apologist]

e.g. Brains Trust?

The train's bust!

[french frank]

Hot on the heels of the Radio 3 announcement, the BBC has announced plans for refreshing Radio 4.

Apparently, it's all about 'giving us what we want most, when we want it'. (Well, that's us told, then - dissenters will be directed to the naughty step.)

As usual, what has not been said is as important as what has been said, and I haven't worked out yet what has been ditched.

I can't help feeling there's a lot of 'downward guidance' at the BBC to help station controllers in making their decisions. Mohit Bakaya seems to have had a good track record.

[Cockney Sparrow]

As usual, what has not been said is as important as what has been said, and I haven't worked out yet what has been ditched.

Reading throught the announcement, I felt pleasantly surprised that it didn't seem to be mirroring the downward spiral that R3 has suffered. It didn't use that phrase "re-imagined" - for example in relation to Dickens, so some hope there. To my mind, re-imagined means "give it a miss"....

I note that Woman's Hour (surely an anachronism now that equality is the warp and weft of all that the BBC broadcasts) has't been mentioned so I have hope it will go on the pile of broadcast history and there will be something I can listen to at 10 am on weekdays. Emma Barnett's rumoured departure to Today, where her unnecessarily combative powers are more appropriate, might be the catalyst for the much needed change.

However, reality intrudes and I suppose you are correct. Just as well Sounds allows me to choose what I listen to........

[smittims]

As a regular listener to Woman's Hour, Cockney Sparrow, I was intrigued by your comments.

I think the continuation of the programme in an age of 'equality' is a sign that women, generally, and their perspective on things, are very much on the agenda these days. Listen to Radio Three next week as they celebrate 'International Women's day' for instance. For me, Emma Barnett was a breath of fresh air when she arrived to present Woman's Hour, tackling serioius topics head on after all those years of knitting, fashion and cookery. I always find it's less good when she's not there, especially on Fridays with the silly Anita Rani and her platitudinous prattle.

The programme is far from faultless: there's a lot of sexism rhat wouldn't be allowed if it were said on Radio 4 by men against women, but it still has a lot going for it. If Emma Barnett is replaced it may be by someone much worse.

[french frank]

there's a lot of sexism rhat wouldn't be allowed if it were said on Radio 4 by men against women, but it still has a lot going for it.

One could think of the present time as being a transition period between male-dominated and equality; and in the meantime the pendulum sometimes swinging in women's favour is inevitable. At this stage in the process, it shouldn't be tit-fot-tat: "if women are allowed to, men should be too; if men can't, women shouldn't be allowed to either". That's just continuing the old battle.

[Ein Heldenleben]

As a regular listener to Woman's Hour, Cockney Sparrow, I was intrigued by your comments.

I think the continuation of the programme in an age of 'equality' is a sign that women, generally, and their perspective on things, are very much on the agenda these days. Listen to Radio Three next week as they celebrate 'International Women's day' for instance. For me, Emma Barnett was a breath of fresh air when she arrived to present Woman's Hour, tackling serioius topics head on after all those years of knitting, fashion and cookery. I always find it's less good when she's not there, especially on Fridays with the silly Anita Rani and her platitudinous prattle.

The programme is far from faultless: there's a lot of sexism rhat wouldn't be allowed if it were said on Radio 4 by men against women, but it still has a lot going for it. If Emma Barnett is replaced it may be by someone much worse.

uo

You must be listening to a different Woman’s Hour . It’s been tacking harder edged subjects than those you list since at least the late 70’s . I worked for it in the early 80’s and it was largely current affairs then not fluff and cookery . They did do a story every day though ..

[LMcD]

As a regular listener to Woman's Hour, Cockney Sparrow, I was intrigued by your comments.

I think the continuation of the programme in an age of 'equality' is a sign that women, generally, and their perspective on things, are very much on the agenda these days. Listen to Radio Three next week as they celebrate 'International Women's day' for instance. For me, Emma Barnett was a breath of fresh air when she arrived to present Woman's Hour, tackling serioius topics head on after all those years of knitting, fashion and cookery. I always find it's less good when she's not there, especially on Fridays with the silly Anita Rani and her platitudinous prattle.

The programme is far from faultless: there's a lot of sexism rhat wouldn't be allowed if it were said on Radio 4 by men against women, but it still has a lot going for it. If Emma Barnett is replaced it may be by someone much worse.

'Much worse' than Emma, than Anita or than both?

[smittims]

I was thinking of Julius Ceasar, (act 3 sc.2). i.e. if Cockney Sparrow thinks Emma Barnett is bad, we may get someone CS would think worse! I can think of a lot worse than EB, but not a lot worse than Anita, bless her.

I didn't listen to WH in the '80s, but by the end of the Jane Garvey/Jenni Murray era it was getting a bit too trivial and the content did take a step up when EB took over. .

[Serial_Apologist]

One could think of the present time as being a transition period between male-dominated and equality; and in the meantime the pendulum sometimes swinging in women's favour is inevitable. At this stage in the process, it shouldn't be tit-for-tat: "if women are allowed to, men should be too; if men can't, women shouldn't be allowed to either". That's just continuing the old battle.

That battle will, sadly, continue for as long as individual men in the end use their generally greater physical strength to cajole, stalk, dominate, belittle, patronise, batter and rape: the continuing sorry tale of trickle down domestic politics. .

[kindofblue]

As regards gender equality, or indeed equality in general, we would be wise not to confuse talk about equality, or programmes devoted to a specific group of people, with actual equality.